Return to BSD News archive
Received: by minnie.vk1xwt.ampr.org with NNTP id AA5192 ; Tue, 22 Dec 92 09:01:12 EST Xref: sserve comp.unix.bsd:9174 comp.os.linux:19894 Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!olivea!uunet!mcsun!Germany.EU.net!rrz.uni-koeln.de!unidui!du9ds3!veit From: veit@du9ds3.fb9dv.uni-duisburg.de (Holger Veit) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd,comp.os.linux Subject: Re: Dumb Americans (was INTERNATIONALIZATION: JAPAN, FAR EAST) Keywords: Han Kanji Katakana Hirugana ISO10646 Unicode Codepages Message-ID: <veit.724926687@du9ds3> Date: 21 Dec 92 08:31:27 GMT References: <1gksolINNmkg@frigate.doc.ic.ac.uk> <mathias.724467456@sune.stacken.kth.se> <id.M2XV.VTA@ferranti.com> <1992Dec18.043033.14254@midway.uchicago.edu> <1992Dec18.212323.26882@netcom.com> Reply-To: veit@du9ds3.fb9dv.uni-duisburg.de Organization: Uni-Duisburg FB9 Datenverarbeitung Lines: 46 NNTP-Posting-Host: du9ds3.fb9dv.uni-duisburg.de In <1992Dec18.212323.26882@netcom.com> messina@netcom.com (Tony Porczyk) writes: >goer@kimbark.uchicago.edu (Richard L. Goerwitz) writes: >>>> Has anyone in this newsgroup ever heard of the Unicode/ISO10646 >>>> (UCS) standard? >>> >>>You know, if 386BSD could be made to support NET-UTF (the Plan 9 version >>>of the 10646 standard) that would be a major advantage over commercial >>>Unices... >>One of the big criticism leveled at US Engineers is that they are either >>too dumb or lazy to build into their software support for non-Western >>scripts. Given that Linux originates in Europe, can we look forward to >>better support for Unicode and ISO10646? At least for "long" charac- >>ter definitions? >Yeah, that's probably why NT supports Unicode, it's those dumb US >Engineers... Could we lay off idiotic generalizations and stick to >technical aspects of the software? It's business that dictates what's >included in the package. If it makes economic sense, it will be there. >Most of the internationalization is done locally anyway, so it has >nothing to do with dumb engineers. chkit lately. Next semester is going to be worse, and I'm losing my network access on my 386BSD machine. Soooo, Does anyone in 386BSD land want to take over the Bug List co-ordination? I have been trying to put out another version of the patchkit, but because of lack of time and trying to re-format the old patchkit, I haven't added many patches. (I have LOTS of them, and more are coming every day) Someone who has more time than me needs to take over the co-ordination if this is going to be kept up to date. I don't mind doing it, but there is no way that I can stay afloat next year and still get the extra work done keeping everything up to date. Next, now that the patchkit fixes most bugs that everyone has, should the Bug Report be discontinued? Are the explanation's in the seperate patches good enough for people to know what has/hasn't been fixed? When I give this thing up, should the next person only have to work on the Patchkit, instead of doing both? The reason I am asking is because both of these projects are pretty intertwined, so having two people working on them would require alot of co-ordina